WI: the Journal Sentinel's at it again

Status
Not open for further replies.

Monkeyleg

Member.
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
5,057
Location
Decatur, AL
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is running a series of articles on secrecy in government. Of course, the first target is concealed carry.

Here it is:

Concealed-carry backers insist on secrecy terms

By PATRICK MARLEY
[email protected]

Posted: Mar. 17, 2006

Madison - If a concealed-weapons bill makes its way into law in Wisconsin, people likely won't be able to find out if their neighbors, co-workers or ex-spouses are packing guns.

The two most recent versions of the bill that have made it through the Legislature had secrecy provisions. Both those bills cleared the Republican-led Legislature, but were vetoed by Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle. Lawmakers have pledged to push a new version forward after the November elections - with the secrecy measure intact.

"When you're talking about something that has the potential to kill another human being, that absolutely should be public," said Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee), an opponent of the bill.

"If we're going to have concealed weapons as a society, I think we should be able to track who has them."

But advocates of concealed weapons say the provision is needed to maintain the privacy of permit-holders and to protect the public from criminals. Supporters say the law will work best if criminals do not know who is carrying concealed weapons because they will fear that any potential victim may be carrying a gun.

State Sen. Dave Zien (R-Eau Claire), one of the bill's authors, said crooks would go after people who don't have permits if the state made public the names of people allowed to carry concealed weapons.

"If I'm a criminal, I'm looking for an easy pushover to rob your wallet or plunder your home," he said.

But Peter Fox, executive director of the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, said Zien's argument "doesn't pass the common-sense test."

"It's such a stretch that criminals would sit down with a database and pick and choose" who to target, Fox said.

Fox's group takes no position on whether concealed weapons should be legal, but opposes withholding the names of permit-holders. Fox noted that the state's open records law says government information should be available unless there is a compelling reason to keep it from the public.

"There is absolutely no good reason this information isn't public information," Fox said of the names of permit-holders.

But Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, said permit-holders have a "basic civil right to privacy."

"I don't think it's in anyone's best interest for the names of these permit-holders to be made public," he said.

He said the "vast majority" of the 46 states with concealed-weapons laws do not make the names of permit-holders available.

In the latest version of the bill, the state attorney general would have had to issue an annual report showing how many people applied for and received permits and how many permit-holders were convicted of drunken driving and other crimes.

A call for full disclosure

Zien said the reporting requirement would prove that permit-holders overwhelmingly follow the law, as gun-rights advocates have long contended.

But Jeri Bonavia, executive director of the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort, said newspapers and the general public would not be able to check the quality of the report by the attorney general unless the names were public.

"I think they don't want us to track what the permit-holders do," Bonavia said. "The pro-gun lobby doesn't want that information out there."

The Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence opposes the bill on the grounds that it would make women less safe. If the bill were to become law, women should be able to check if their estranged spouses or boyfriends acquire concealed-weapons permits, said the group's policy director, Linda Mayfield.

"To keep the names concealed is too scary," said Mayfield, who ran the Milwaukee Women's Center for more than a decade.

Under the bill, people convicted of domestic violence or who have restraining orders against them for threatening behavior could not legally carry concealed weapons. But Mayfield said victims often are too afriad to press charges or to seek restraining orders.

The Legislature has twice passed concealed-weapons bills in recent years. The Senate overrode both of Doyle's vetoes, but the Assembly failed to do so by one vote in 2004 and two votes in January.

Both of the bills were amended at the last minute to garner more support. The amendments further restricted where concealed weapons could be carried, but the secrecy provision went unchanged in both cases.

Secrecy provision will be back

Zien and others have promised to bring the bill back with the secrecy provision, saying they hope to add a few more supporters to their ranks in the Assembly. They also note both the Republicans running against Doyle - U.S. Rep. Mark Green of Green Bay and Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker - support the concealed-weapons bills.

The secrecy measure "is one of the stronger provisions that we are very, very serious about keeping in," Zien said.

Zien said making the names public had been a problem in other states because permit-holders' names were published in newspapers or on Web sites and that they were "barraged" with phone calls from opponents.

The Journal Sentinel is among many newspapers across the country featuring stories this week designed to drive public discussion about why open government is important to everyone, not just to journalists.
 
Liberals will riot to protect your "privacy" at a government owned library to read government owned books and use government owned computers but your private property ie guns and your privacy to carry is idiotic and should not be. They do not care to know who a terrorist is but you as a gunowner they want to know and they will print your name and address in their little propaganda paper to make sure you know they know. Hypocrits and statists when it suits their agenda.
 
Must be something in the water. The Post-Crescent has been on a kick about government "secrecy" and FOI requests recently.
 
Oh the stupid violence aganist women groups. Have they thought that the women who have permits to protect themselves would be disclosed also or are they so blinded by their loyality to a ideology they don't give a crap.
 
Oh the stupid violence aganist women groups. Have they thought that the women who have permits to protect themselves would be disclosed also or are they so blinded by their loyality to a ideology they don't give a crap.

Dead on and dead right.

If some woman it truly being threatened it is probable that the person already has a gun, or will get one legally of otherwise. If he is certain that his potential target is armed he most certainly will get one.

On the part of the media, the purpose behind this it to have a way to intimidate people from applying for a license. Do they propose that personal medical records should be public too?

I have always like the approach where the editors are informed that if the paper reveals the names and address of permit holders, THEIR personal names, address and phone numbers (including staff members and such) will soon be posted all over the Internet. :evil:

Oh, the outrage... :D
 
I am encouraged.

What's the 2007 legislative cycle?

IIRC, the PPA won't be introduced untill spring '07, possibly not until fall '07. That's approximately one year to 18+ months away. And that's with an intervening election that might not go "our way" on CCW.

So why are they writing about this now? I've heard that the easiest way to understand why an article is written is to read the last sentence:

The Journal Sentinel is among many newspapers across the country featuring stories this week designed to drive public discussion about why open government is important to everyone, not just to journalists.

So fine, it's "National whiny MSM open records week." Hooray for you Journal-Sentinel. But why pick on CCW? Can't they find anything better, like something that would uncover political corruption?

I think this means the Journal Sentinel thinks CCW in WI is inevitable, as do I. And they want to lay the groundwork for printing THE LIST, just like Ohio papers did. So they can feel smug as they try and embarrass and shame those evil conservative redneck gun-owners in their paper. Maybe even get a few ostricized from virulent anti-gun family, or fired from biased jobs.

Frankly, if giving "THE LIST" to the MSM is what it would take to give us CCW in WI NOW. I'd make that trade. I just don't care anymore.
 
I think if I was answering this piece of slimy left-wing journalism I would point out that there is no reason for them, or the permit holders' neighbors, friends, relatives, employers, etc. to know who they are, because the State of Wisconsin has vouched for they're integrity and trustworthiness to carry a weapon through extensive background checks and mandated training before any license was issued.

On the other hand, the media has a well-deserved reputation for revealing anything they can get their hands on, including the identity of CIA agents. National security means nothing to them if the can pick up a few rating points or an increase in circulation. Lets expose their corruption and motives.
 
Perhaps someone in Wisconsin should publish (or publicize) the names AND addresses of the Journal-Sentinal's writers/editors/publisher... along with that of the usual local anti-2A activists.

Alternately, a few hundred flyers with that info -- distributed about the seedier neighborhoods in the state -- will help 'em gag on their own "no secrets" policy.

In addition, a few signs planted in their front yards declaring "This Is A Gun-Free/Safe-For-Crooks Zone" would drive home the point.

Fight fire with fire.
 
If a concealed-weapons bill makes its way into law in Wisconsin, people likely won't be able to find out if their neighbors, co-workers or ex-spouses are packing guns.

Okay. Fine. Let's publish the names of welfare recipients, people who've had abortions, people who subscribe to leftist magazines, people who've had parking and speeding tickets, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Oh, but that's somehow different, right?
 
Why don't these idiots start with asking the Federal Government to quit protection the Communist Party USA and make them list their contributors like all other parties by law have to do. You do realize the Fed Government protects the Commies. Why someone might hurt one of them.
 
As above posters have noted, the JS seems to acknowledge that it's not a question of if, but when, concealed carry passes in WI.

If the media lobby--which is huge--demands and gets a concession to allow public access to permit holder records, then all bets are off.

If some punk writer at the JS is intent on publishing names of permit holders, then we strike back.

Big time.

We circulate the names of all of the reporters and editors of the JS all over the internet. We put out their addresses. We find out what hobbies they have (coin collecting, jewelry, etc).

We get any info on their children, including info from their friends at school. Can so-and-so's daughter really suck a golf ball through a garden hose?

If so, let's get that info.

Pictures, too.

And, if these SOB's want to play rough, we'll let them know how rough it can get.

I and other WCCA volunteers have behaved like gentlemen when dealing with the press.

If they want to behave like thugs, we can do that, too.
 
Standing Wolf said:
Okay. Fine. Let's publish the names of welfare recipients, people who've had abortions, people who subscribe to leftist magazines, people who've had parking and speeding tickets, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Oh, but that's somehow different, right?

[rant]Of course it's different! Guns are evviiillll, and inherently dangerous. Hey, you don't know when a law-abiding, honest, upright citizen carrying with a permit is going to end up with a screw loose. I mean, we have to know who may be carrying concealed because criminals would never dream of sticking a firearm down their waistband, in which you wouldn't know whose carrying anyway. :rolleyes: :scrutiny: :barf:[/rant off]

C'mon, I've got a right to keep and bear arms, including concealed, no ifs, ands, or buts, and it ain't no-meddling-body's business.
 
If they want to behave like thugs, we can do that, too.

Don't forget to mention that you plan to distribute lists of they're advertisers at gun shows, through gun clubs, dealers, the Internet ...

Who knows what gun-rights activists might do... :evil:
 
The Capital Times in Madison and the Journal-Sentinel in Milwaukee are both very liberal in their outlook. Actually, I can't hardly read the Cap Times, they're so off base most of the time.

Outside of the Madison & Milwaukee metro areas, Wisconsin is somewhat more conservative, particularly the Fox Valley.
 
The Capital Times in Madison and the Journal-Sentinel in Milwaukee are both very liberal in their outlook. Actually, I can't hardly read the Cap Times, they're so off base most of the time.

Outside of the Madison & Milwaukee metro areas, Wisconsin is somewhat more conservative, particularly the Fox Valley.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top